Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Hermeneutics in the Field: The Philosophy of Geology

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Book cover The Multidimensionality of Hermeneutic Phenomenology

Part of the book series: Contributions to Phenomenology ((CTPH,volume 70))

Abstract

Geology has had a marginal place within the philosophy of science; its processes and results have not matched our traditional ideas concerning the nature and outcomes of scientific reasoning. This is a reflection of the fact that philosophy of science has been, with few exceptions, implicitly or explicitly the philosophy of physics, and more generally the philosophy of lab science. In actuality, geological reasoning provides a rich and realistic account of the power and limitations of scientific reasoning. It also highlights the hermeneutic and historical nature of reasoning, scientific or otherwise, and the neglected kinship between reasoning in the sciences and the humanities.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 84.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Hardcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    I have made similar arguments concerning the nature of philosophy, which also has been excessively disciplined, and which needs greater exposure to the field perspectives (e.g., Frodeman 2010, 2013).

  2. 2.

    Cf. Laudan (1987).

  3. 3.

    Exceptions to this general neglect include David B. Kitts (1977), W.V., Engelhardt and J. Zimmermann (1988 [1982]), Ronald Giere (1988), Oreskes et al. (1994), Frodeman (1995, 2003), Rom Harré (2000), Robert John Inkpen (2009), and Bechtel and Herschbach (2010).

  4. 4.

    In addition, Babich (2010) features a section on “Philosophy of Geology or Modelling and Its Discontents,” 362ff. in addition to Babich (2013) for a section “Grounding Physical Science: Geology and Deep Time,” 271ff.

  5. 5.

    Nelson Goodman (1967).

  6. 6.

    But see Cervato and Frodeman (2012).

  7. 7.

    E.g., Stanley A. Schumm (1991) and Derek V. Ager (1993).

  8. 8.

    See Stephen Jay Gould (1997 [1987]), Niles Eldredge (1995), Peter D. Ward (1998), Edward O. Wilson (1998).

  9. 9.

    Doreen Massey (1999).

  10. 10.

    Leiter 2007.

  11. 11.

    Martin J. S. Rudwick (1976).

  12. 12.

    Maurice Merleau-Ponty (1993).

  13. 13.

    Martin Heidegger (1962).

  14. 14.

    Andrew Pickering (1992), Karin Knorr-Cetina (1999).

  15. 15.

    Paul A. David (2000).

  16. 16.

    Cf. Nancy Cartwright (1983).

  17. 17.

    Hull (1976).

  18. 18.

    Ivo Lucchitta (1990).

  19. 19.

    Hayden White (1963).

  20. 20.

    Naomi Oreskes (2000).

  21. 21.

    I offer versions of this argument in Frodeman (1995) as well as Frodeman (2003).

References

  • Ager, Derek V. 1993. The nature of the stratigraphical record. Chichester: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Babich, Babette. 2010. Towards a critical philosophy of science: Continental beginnings and bugbears, whigs and waterbears. International Journal of the Philosophy of Science 24(4): 343–391.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Babich, Babette. 2013. Early continental philosophy of science. In The new century: Bergsonism, phenomenology, and responses to modern science, ed. K. Ansell-Pearson and Alan Schrift, 263–286. Durham: Acumen.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bechtel, W., and M. Herschbach. 2010. Philosophy of the cognitive sciences. In Philosophy of the sciences, ed. Fritz Allhoff, 237–261. Oxford: Blackwell.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Cartwright, Nancy. 1983. How the laws of physics lie. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Cervato, Cinzia, and Robert Frodeman. 2012. The significance of geologic time. Earth in mind, II, GSA special volume.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chamberlin, T.C. 1890. The method of multiple working hypotheses. Science 15: 92–96.

    Google Scholar 

  • David, Paul A. 2000. Path dependence, its vritics and the quest for historical economics. In Evolution and path dependence in economic ideas: Past and present, ed. P. Garrouste and S. Ioannides. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Eldredge, Niles. 1995. Dominion. New York: H. Holt.

    Google Scholar 

  • Engelhardt, W.V., and J. Zimmermann. 1988 [1982]. Theory of earth science. New York: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Frodeman, Robert. 1995. Geological reasoning: Geology as an interpretive and historical science. GSA Bulletin 107: 960–968.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Frodeman, Robert. 2003. Geologic: Breaking ground between philosophy and the earth sciences. Albany: State University of New York Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Frodeman, Robert. 2010. Experiments in field philosophy. New York Times. November 23.

    Google Scholar 

  • Frodeman, Robert. 2013. Philosophy dedisciplined. Synthese 190(11): 1917–1936. July 2013.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Giere, Ronald N. 1988. Explaining science: A cognitive approach. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Gilbert, G.K. 1886. The inculcation of scientific method by example. American Journal of Science 31: 284–299. 3rd ser.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Goodman, Nelson. 1967. Uniformity and simplicity. In Uniformity and simplicity: A symposium on the principle of the uniformity of nature, New York: Geological society of America special paper, vol. 89, ed. C.C. Albritton Jr. et al., 93–99.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Gould, Stephen Jay. 1997. Time’s arrow, time’s cycle. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Harré, Rom. 2000. Philosophy and geology. In The Oxford companion to the Earth, ed. P. Hancock and B.J. Skinner, 821–822. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Heidegger, Martin. 1962. Being and Time. Trans. John, MacQuarrie, and Edward, Robinson. London: SCM Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hull, D.L. 1976. Central subjects and historical narratives. History and Theory 14: 253–274.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Inkpen, Robert John. 2009. The philosophy of geology. In A companion to the philosophy of history and historiography, ed. A. Tucker, 318–329. Chichester: Wiley-Blackwell.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Kitts, David B. 1977. The structure of geology. Dallas: SMU Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Knorr-Cetina, Karin. 1999. Epistemic cultures: How the sciences make knowledge. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lauden, Rachel. 1987. From mineralogy to geology: The foundations of a science, 1650–1830. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Leiter, Brian. 2007. The future for philosophy. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lucchitta, Ivo. 1990. The history of the Colorado river and the Grand Canyon. In Grand Canyon geology, ed. Stanley Beus and Michael Morales. Flagstaff: Museum of Northern Arizona Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Massey, Doreen. 1999. Space-time, science, and the relationship between physical geography and human geography. Institute of British Geography 24: 264.

    Google Scholar 

  • McPhee, John. 1981. Basin and range. New York: Farrar, Straus and Giroux.

    Google Scholar 

  • McPhee, John. 1983. In suspect terrain. New York: Farrar, Straus and Giroux.

    Google Scholar 

  • Merleau-Ponty, Maurice. 1993. Eye and mind. In: The Merleau-Ponty Aesthetics Reader, ed. Galen A. Johnson (trans: Michael B. Smith). Evanston: Northwestern University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Oreskes, Naomi. 2000. Why predict? Historical perspectives on prediction in Earth science. In Prediction: Science, decision making, and the future of nature, ed. Sarewitz Daniel, Roger A. Pielke Jr, and Radford Byerly Jr., 23–40. Washington, DC: Island Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Oreskes, Naomi, Kristin Shrader-Frechette, and Kenneth Belitz. 1994. Verification, validation, and confirmation of numerical models. Science 263(5147): 641–646. Feb 4 1994.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pickering, Andrew (ed.). 1992. Science as practice and culture. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rudwick, Martin J.S. 1976. The emergence of a visual language for geological science, 1760-1840. History of Science 14: 149–195.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schumm, Stanley A. 1991. To interpret the Earth. New York: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ward, Peter D. 1998. Time machines: Scientific explorations in deep time. New York: Copernicus.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • White, Hayden. 1963. The logic of historical narration. Philosophy and History 3: 4–14.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wilson, Edward O. 1998. Consilience: The unity of knowledge. New York: Knopf.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. CSID/Philosophy, University of North Texas, 1155 Union Circle #310920, Denton, TX, 76203-0920, USA

    Robert Frodeman

Authors
  1. Robert Frodeman
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Robert Frodeman .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Fordham University, New York, New York, USA

    Babette Babich

  2. St. Kliment Ohridski University, Sofia, Bulgaria

    Dimitri Ginev

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2014 Springer International Publishing Switzerland

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Frodeman, R. (2014). Hermeneutics in the Field: The Philosophy of Geology. In: Babich, B., Ginev, D. (eds) The Multidimensionality of Hermeneutic Phenomenology. Contributions to Phenomenology, vol 70. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-01707-5_5

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation